Tag Archives: D4
- Home
- Posts tagged "D4" (Page 4)
loading..
Student Accommodation
ENR (December 7, 2023) University of Michigan Signs P3 for $631M Student Housing Project
Harvard University Dormitory Room | Smithsonian Museum | Thomas Warren Sears Collection
Today we break down public consultation notices for literature that sets the standard of care for the safety and sustainability of student housing in K-12 prep schools, colleges and universities. We deal with off-campus housing in a separate session because it involves local safety and sustainability regulations; most of which are derived from residential housing codes and standards.
The topic cuts across many disciplines and standards setting organization bibliographies. We usually set our bearing with the following titles:
2021 International Building Code: Section 310 Residential Group R-2 + related titles such as the IFC, IMC, IPC, IECC
2021 Fire Code: Chapter 6 Classification of Occupancy + related titles such as NFPA 70B, NFPA 72 and NFPA 110
2023 National Electrical Code: Articles 210-230 + related Articles 110 and 410
ASHRAE 90.1 Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings: Annex G
Like any other classification of real property the average cost for room and board for a public university student dormitory depends on several factors such as the location of the university, the type of dormitory, and the meal plan options. According to the College Board, the average cost of room and board for the 2021-2022 academic year at a public four-year in-state institution was $11,620. However, this figure can range from around $7,000 to $16,000 or more depending on the specific institution and its location. It’s important to note that this average cost only includes the basic meal plan and standard dormitory room. Students may also have additional costs for a larger or more luxurious dorm room, a premium meal plan, or other expenses such as laundry or parking fees.
According to ring Rider Levett Bucknall, a global property and construction consultancy firm, the average construction cost for a student housing facility in the United States in 2021 was around $202 per square foot. However, this figure can range from around $150 to $300 per square foot or more depending on the specific project. Life cycle cost for new facilities with tricked out net-zero gadgets is hard to come by at the moment.
Because money flows freely through this domain we examine scalable densities and the nature of money flow patterns; partially tracked by the Electronic Municipal Market Access always on the standing agenda of our Finance colloquium.
More
National Institute of Standards & Technology: The Character of Residential Cooktop Fires
Deserted College Dorms Sow Trouble for $14 Billion in Muni Bonds
Here are a few pros and cons of private sector construction of university-owned student housing:
Pros:
- Increased housing availability: Private sector developers may be able to build more student housing units than a university could build on its own, which can help to alleviate the shortage of on-campus housing for students.
- Faster construction: Private developers may be able to complete construction projects faster than universities, which can help to reduce the amount of time that students must wait for new housing options.
- Reduced financial burden on the university: The cost of building and maintaining student housing can be significant, and private sector developers may be willing to bear some of these costs. This can help to reduce the financial burden on the university and free up resources for other initiatives.
- Professional management: Private developers may have more experience managing large housing projects and may be able to provide more professional management services than a university could provide on its own.
Cons:
- Higher costs for students: Private developers may charge higher rents than a university would charge for student housing, which can make housing less affordable for some students.
- Reduced university control: Private developers may have different priorities than a university would have when it comes to building and managing student housing. This can lead to a reduced level of control for the university over housing quality, management, and policies.
- Potential conflicts of interest: Private developers may be more focused on making a profit than on meeting the needs of students or the university, which can create potential conflicts of interest.
- Less transparency: Private developers may not be subject to the same level of transparency and accountability as a university would be when it comes to housing policies, decision-making processes, and financial management.
It’s important to note that these pros and cons may vary depending on the specific circumstances and context of each individual university and private sector partnership.
Mobility & Parking
Statement on the Electric Vehicle Zietgeist
University of Michigan Campus Transportation Master Plan
Die Fachhochschule Wedel bei Hamburg
The Invention of the Wheel – The Journey to Civilization
Today we amble through the literature providing policy templates informing school district, college and university-affiliated transportation and parking facilities and systems. Starting 2024 we will break up our coverage thus:
Mobility 100 (Survey of both ground and air transportation instructional and research facilities)
Mobility 200 (Ground Transportation)
Police officer asks little girl for driver’s license.pic.twitter.com/8gVBiJNZiV
— The Figen (@TheFigen_) February 6, 2025
Mobility 300 (Air Transportation)
Mobility 400 (Reserved for zoning, parking space allocation and enforcement, and issues related to one of the most troublesome conditions in educational settlements)
Today’s session will be the last when we cover both land and air transportation codes, standards, guidelines and the regulations that depend upon all them. We will break out space and aerospace mobility into a separate session — largely because many universities are tooling up square footage and facilities in anticipation of research grants.
Public consultation originates from the following organizations:
International Electrotechnical Commission
International Organization for Standardization
Intelligent Transport Systems
Road Vehicles
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
Intelligent Transportation Systems Society
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE International)
Like many SDO’s the SAE makes it very easy to purchase a standard but makes it very difficulty to find a draft standard open for public review. It is not an open process; one must apply to comment on a draft standard. Moreover, its programmers persist in playing “keep away” with landing pages.
Technical Standards for Road Vehicles and Intelligent Vehicle Systems
International Code Council
National Fire Protection Association
Association of Transportation Safety Information Professionals
International Light Transportation Vehicle Association
Non-Emergency Medical Transportation Accreditation Commission
Noteworthy:
The public school bus system in the United States is the largest public transit system in the United States. According to the American School Bus Council, approximately 25 million students in the United States ride school buses to and from school each day, which is more than twice the number of passengers that use all other forms of public transportation combined.
The school bus system is considered a public transit system because it is operated by public schools and school districts, and provides a form of transportation that is funded by taxpayers and available to the general public. The school bus system also plays a critical role in ensuring that students have access to education, particularly in rural and low-income areas where transportation options may be limited.
Something is always happening in this domain:
A Quiet Rollout: Electric Scooters on Campus
Notre Dame Police Department shares gameday parking restrictions, tips
Electric School Bus Market Size, Industry Share, Analysis, Report and Forecast 2022-2027
Non profit associations proliferate:
American School Bus Council
American Bus Association
Campus Parking and Transportation Association
National Association for Pupil Transportation
National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services
National School Transportation Association
School Bus Manufacturers Association
…and 50-state spinoffs of the foregoing. (See our ABOUT for further discussion of education industry non-profit associations)
There are several ad hoc consortia in this domain also; which include plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Charging specifications are at least temporarily “stable”; though who should pay for the charging infrastructure in the long run is a debate we have tracked for several revision cycles in building and fire codes.
Because incumbents are leading the electromobility transformation, and incumbents have deep pockets for market-making despite the “jankiness” of the US power grid, we can track some (not all) legislation action, and prospective public comment opportunities. For example:
Keep in mind that even though proposed legislation is sun-setted in a previous (116th) Congress, the concepts may be carried forward into the following Congress (117th).
Public consultations on mobility technologies relevant to the education facility industry are also covered by the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets 4 times monthly in European and American time zones.
This topic is growing rapidly and it may well be that we will have to break it up into more manageable pieces. For the moment, today’s colloquium is open to everyone. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
Transport Security
Great but she's not safe on that public transport pic.twitter.com/sjqrMoY9Rt
— The Aureus Press (@Trad_West_Art) November 6, 2025
American Vitruvius
University of Michigan North Quad
Robert A. M. Stern is an American architect, educator, and author known for his contributions to the field of architecture, urbanism, and design. Stern has been particularly influential in shaping the aesthetics of educational campuses through his architectural practice and academic involvement. Here are some key aspects of his approach to the aesthetics of educational campuses that attract philanthropic legacies:
- Pedagogical Ideals:
- Stern’s designs for educational campuses often reflect his understanding of pedagogical ideals. He considers the spatial organization and layout of buildings in relation to the educational mission of the institution.
- Spaces are designed to foster a sense of community, encourage interaction, and support the overall educational experience.
- Traditional and Classical Influences:
- Stern is known for his commitment to classical and traditional architectural styles. He often draws inspiration from historical architectural forms and traditional design principles.
- His work reflects a belief in the enduring value of classical architecture and its ability to create a sense of timelessness and continuity.
- Contextual Design:
- Stern emphasizes the importance of contextual design, taking into consideration the existing architectural context and the cultural or historical characteristics of the surrounding area.
- When designing educational campuses, he often seeks to integrate new buildings harmoniously into the existing campus fabric.
- Attention to Detail:
- Stern is known for his meticulous attention to detail. His designs often feature carefully crafted elements, including ornamental details, materials, and proportions.
- This focus on detail contributes to the creation of visually rich and aesthetically pleasing environments.
- Adaptation of Historical Forms:
- While Stern’s work is firmly rooted in traditional and classical architecture, he also demonstrates an ability to adapt historical forms to contemporary needs. His designs often feature a synthesis of timeless architectural elements with modern functionality.
Art, Design & Fashion Studios
Art presents a different way of looking at things than science;
one which preserves the mystery of things without undoing the mystery.
NFPA 1 Second Draft Meeting (A2026) June 2 – 3, 2025
“Interior de Ateliê” 1898 Rafael Frederico
We are guided by four interdependent titles that set the standard of care for safety and sustainability of occupancies supporting the fine arts in education communities.
(1) Chapter 43: Spraying, Dipping and Coating Using Flammable or Combustible Material of NFPA 1: Fire Code. As a “code” the public has free access to the current 2021 Edition , and Chapter 43 at the link below:
NFPA 1 Fire Code / Chapter 43 Spraying, Dipping and Coating Using Flammable or Combustible Materials
You get a sense of the back-and-forth among the technical committee members from the transcripts of committee activity linked below:
First Revisions Report (282 pages)
Our interest lies in fire safety provisions for educational occupancies with activity involving paint, chemicals used with paint (art studios) and Class III combustible materials (garment design & prototyping).
(2) NFPA also has another title — NFPA 33 Standard for Spray Application Using Flammable or Combustible Materials — provides more detail for instructional and facility maintenance operations activity.
(3) NFPA 101 Life Safety Code, much of which is derived from NFPA 1 (See: “How the Fire Code and Life Safety Code Work Together“)
(4) Finally, the International Code Council develops a competitor title — 2021 International Fire Code — which also provides fire safety standards for art, design and fashion studio safety. The IFC is developed in the Group A tranche of titles:
2021/2022 Code Development Group A
2024/2025/2026 ICC CODE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
We encourage direct participation by education industry user-interests in the ICC and the NFPA code development process. A user interest in education community would have a job title similar to the following: Principal, Dean, President, Chief of Business Operations, Facility Manager, Trade Shop Foreman.
Harvard University
We maintain all four titles identified in this post on the standing agenda of our Prometheus (fire safety) and Fine Arts colloquia. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Issue: [10-31] [16-64]
Category: Fire Safety
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Josh Evolve, Marcelo Hirschler
More
Northeastern University: Safety Guide for Art Studios
Princeton University: Art Safety
University of Chicago Art Studio Safety Policy
Kitchen Wiring
“Le Coin de Cuisine” | 1883 Edwin Deakin
Education communities are stewards of hundreds of commercial-class kitchens in which the proximate risk of electrical energy must be managed — water spills and grease, fires, worn electrical cords on countertop equipment, faulty wiring or equipment, damaged outlets or connectors, and improperly used or damaged extension cords among them. The safety and sustainability rules for this occupancy class is identified as Assembly Group A-2 in Section 303 of the International Building Code
We explore recent transcripts of expert committee activity in NEC Article 210 and provide links to video commentary.
Public comment on the Second Draft of the 2026 NEC will be received until April 18. We typically coordinate our effort with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee. The workspace set up for generating proposals can be found in the link below.
2023 National Electrical Code (Free Access)
Other access portals:
Michigan Electrical Code: Part 8 Rules
Transcripts of the 2023 NEC are linked below:
We examine transcripts to track technical specifics that apply to student accommodation kitchens (on and off campus), university-affiliated hospital kitchens and sport arenas.
Relevant Research:
Smart Kitchen: Real Time Monitoring of Kitchen through IoT
Design of Chinese Smart Kitchen Based on Users’ Behavior
Intelligent kitchen management system based on gas safety
A Futuristic Kitchen Assistant – Powered by Artificial Intelligence and Robotics
A Multi-radar Architecture for Human Activity Recognition in Indoor Kitchen Environments
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwB pic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
— USPTO (@uspto) July 13, 2023
Welcome
Standards Michigan Group, LLC
2723 South State Street | Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104 USA
888-746-3670
DIRECTIONS
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content